Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama: 'clear the way' for new trade agreements

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:40 PM
Original message
Obama: 'clear the way' for new trade agreements
U.S. President Barack Obama said on Thursday it is time to "clear the way" for trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea.

"Now it's time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama, Colombia and South Korea -- while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition," Obama said in a speech to Congress on jobs and the U.S. economy.

"If Americans can buy Kias and Hyundais, I want to see folks in South Korea driving Fords and Chevys and Chryslers. I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America,'" Obama said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/08/obama-jobs-tr...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. I bet these agreements will be every bit as good as NAFTA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. NAFTA = continental labor arbitrage. Just playing workers against even poorer workers. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. NAFTA
Normal Americans Fucked Through Arbitrage
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. Yup!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. No more "free" trade!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Repubs stood up and applauded for that. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
39. THAT is exactly the problem...
I will never forget the gut cramp when I saw repugs and dems sucking each others asses over their agreement on the necessity of NAFTA and GATT...even as 80% of the voting public opposed these agreements.

Obama is no better...The labor party is dead...both parties have turned their leadership over to those who take orders from those who profit from exportation of US jobs.

..fuckers..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. Yes, exactly. They sit on their hands for anything that might
be worthwhile but applaude ANYTHING that hurts working Americans, they ALL make me sick. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. Will these trade agreements benefit American workers... or just big corporations
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 06:47 PM by Marrah_G
Frankly I see the words "Trade Agreement" and I want to start punching people in the face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. They will create many jobs, never fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. It is true they will
Free Trade creates all kinds of jobs, just move to South Korea and you will be able to get a job no problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. The agreement is not particularly popular among labor here in Korea either
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Oh I am sure it is not...
This may create more jobs in South Korea, but it also will almost certainly result in lower wages and crappier working conditions. "Free Trade" has enormously high costs for labor on both sides of the deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. I'm curious as to why workers in S. Korea would be against this
It's always interesting to hear your take on things on the other side of the Sea of Japan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
51. On the other side of the East Sea
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 10:05 PM by rpannier
1. there are subsidies and protections for farmers (most farm use manual labor and are not corporate owned - they are probably one of the few things left that aren't partnered with one of the big 6 Chaebol)- that would be lost

-It has been confirmed that the legal status of the agreement is different in the implementation legislation currently under review by the U.S. Congress. Whereas South Korea has given the agreement precedence over all current domestic laws, the U.S. plans to assign it status below not only federal law but also state law. (on edit: This would apply to labor and environmental laws)

- A South Korean investor might be subject to restrictions according to U.S. federal or state law, it would be a violation of the agreement to punish a U.S. investor according to South Korean law.

- More than thirty domestic laws conflict with the agreement and those laws would be null under the free trade agreement without any discussion.

*These are four that have come up often in discussion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. Very interesting
Thank you for your insight :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #51
56. Invaluable insight, thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #51
58. This is precisely what I dislike about the trade agreements.
Edited on Fri Sep-09-11 02:43 AM by JDPriestly
Not only do they cost us jobs, but they override our law. I will believe that these agreements will leave to Americans the right to enforce our own employment, environmental and other laws, when I see it.

NAFTA set up a court that requires member countries to comply with the decisions of the NAFTA court on certain environmental issues, for example. It is easy to see an environmental regulation as a veiled trade restriction or protection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
54. No, you won't. You can't speak the language, you're probably way too undisciplined, etc...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #7
57. But not in the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #57
62. +
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. Here's why I'm not worried:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaValle Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. HAFTA? Yeah right
I can send a clock to Canada, and they pay a huge duty on it Like 50% of it's value. but if someone in Canada sends me one I pay 4%

Now to make Free trade? Extremely simple.

Whatever laws they have goods from the USA going into their country, we place exactly the same laws on their goods coming into the USA.

soo extremely simple. If they don't like 50% duty on their product coming into the USA then don't charge 50% on ours going into your country.soo simple and fair no one can complain at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Oh yeah, we can see that all the damage from NAFTA has clearly
been repealed. He's doing just so much to enforce so many rules to help the working people in the US. :eyes:

You can always be reliably counted upon to find something with a minor effect, and imply that it's somehow huge and incredibly world-changing instead.

He's proposing 3 more NAFTAs. Only you could find reasons to cheer this as a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #17
27. The Democrats won't pass it without the Trade Assistance Act which helps mitigate jobs losses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. NYTimes: Trade assistance practically useless, displaced workers not helped
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. The title of that article is not the subject of your post, and the text does not support...
...your subject, either. Drop the dishonesty. The Republicans fought the Trade Assistance Act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Wait, stop, rewind: How does "the text not support the subject"?


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/us/06retrain.html

Nonetheless, a little-noticed study the Labor Department released several months ago found that the benefits of the biggest federal job training program were small or nonexistent for laid-off workers. It showed little difference in earnings and the chances of being rehired between laid-off people who had been retrained and those who had not.]


"joshcryer": "Drop the dishonesty."

Are you from the Karl Rove school of accusing the other person of doing exactly what you yourself are guilty of?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. TAA is not the same as NWLB.
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 07:52 PM by joshcryer
Simple. You said "Trade assistance is practically useless," but that would apply to "No Worker Left Behind." I'm sorry, but in my book, this is called dishonest. Framing one thing as something else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. Maybe in Karl Rove's book of Making Up Bull$hit, that would be mislabeled "dishonest"
And pushed as such. But as it turns out, the study quoted by the New York Times discusses the federal trade assistance programs in general, not merely "No Worker Left Behind", as if that makes a bit of difference anyway.

You're not related to Mr. Burns' spokesweasel Smithers, are you?



http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Workf...

This study reports results of a nonexperimental net impact evaluation of the Adult and Dislocated
Worker programs under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. And yet, that paper doesn't mention it once. WIA doesn't give a worker 2 years of benefits, etc.
They're completely different issues.

The problem with TAA is that it doesn't do enough but the extended funding for TAA would close the gap, which is why the Heritage Foundation, among others, are vehemently against expanding it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #17
28. Good to know because politicians keeping their jobs
is of great concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
20. Another reason: Our trade is almost balanced with FTA countries, big deficit with others.
In 2010 our total trade with the 17 countries we have FTA's with was $1.115 trillion. We had a deficit of $71.1 billion (6.5% of the total).

In 2010 our total trade with all non-FTA countries was $2.108 trillion. We had a deficit of $574.8 billion (27.3% of the total).

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Wow, that's an incredible link, thank you for that. Completely unbelievable.
Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #20
61. But if we had tariffs, our trade deficit would not make any difference
because the more we imported the more tax revenue we could raise -- and we could use that revenue to invest in infrastructure and tax relief that would boost our industry and create jobs.

So the free trade agreements are a huge blow to our economy when compared to tariffs. And Thom Hartmann has frequently pointed out, tariffs were the original plan for our country's economy. Tariffs made us strong.

(Hamilton helped found the United States Mint; the first national bank; and an elaborate system of duties, tariffs, and excises. In five years, the complete Hamiltonian program replaced the chaotic financial system of the confederation era with a modern apparatus that gave the new government financial stability, and gave investors sufficient confidence to invest in government bonds.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton

Doing away with tariffs has caused our current problems. We should help underdeveloped countries in ways that do not hurt poor and poorly paid Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cowpunk Donating Member (572 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #20
66. Can you explain how you came up with these numbers?
I clicked on your link. There's just more links there. Are we to assume you went through the numbers for every country and added them up, or did you do it some other way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. She got them directly from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. Sure. We have FTA's with 17 countries. I added our imports and exports from each of them
to get a total of imports, exports and the deficit for the group.

One of the links has the figures for total of our imports from and exports to all countries. I took the global import/export figures and subtracted the import/export amounts from the group of 17 FTA countries to get the figures for non-FTA countries, then figured the percentages from there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Scribe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
53. You should be worried.
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 10:29 PM by Union Scribe
I don't see why they can't outsource what you do. Or maybe they already have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 03:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
60. But this trade agreement will way outlast Obama's presidency.
By the way, Obama's jobs plan is very much like the plan of the Chamber of Commerce.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

But Obama used his jobs plan as an excuse to cut the funds flowing into the Social Security Trust Fund. My congressman says that Obama's plan is to replenish the Social Security funds that his proposal will cost with funds from the general fund.

That is a joke. Congress will agree with the cuts in payroll taxes and the ensuing depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund -- and then will claim it can't repay the Social Security Trust Fund because there is no money.

So much for your Nonsense. It lacks Common Sense. In case that is too complicated for this late hour: Your Two Cents just don't make Sense.

Face it. Obama is a Republican. He could care less about the poor, the disabled and the elderly. They are just bargaining chips for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
68. What about Obama's lies regarding NAFTA?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamsterDem Donating Member (819 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. Clear the way for further reduced wages/employment. Great, great idea. Let's do more of that. nt
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Maybe I can get a third part time job!!!!!
ANd thank the goddess for the Teamsters. My Ex can not only support his kids but the health and dental are great. We need more Unions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamsterDem Donating Member (819 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. We truly are becoming a part-time nation. It saddens me more than you know
The America in which I was raised had part-time jobs but it wasn't nearly as common that so many people were holding so many of them. Then again the America in which I was raised would have never thought cutting taxes after cutting taxes after cutting taxes would somehow have a different effect.

I can barely believe where we are as a nation, sister. And where we are is another thing which pains me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Yup
I work for a small progressive owned life ins brokerage part time during the day. The office is down to just me and the owner and me just part time. Then off I go to ring a register at a pharmacy just so I can bring home enough to pay the bills. Fortunately I live in MA and have been able to buy into state heath care, but I am 41 with no saving, no retirement, no 401... no future really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamsterDem Donating Member (819 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Sickening. Just sickening that people now have to do that after
decades of stagnating wages, job exportation by the millions, and an ever-widening wealth gap. I suppose that's partially why I get a kick out of anti-union comments: We may not be perfect but we do fight for/against the things which ultimately mean the most to everyone at the end of the day. I only wish we could help more people. But the Republicans (singularly) have made it so difficult to organize that we can barely accomplish it in units where the internal polls show like 85% and over pre-election support.

And that leaves people working 2, 3, and even more jobs just to survive. But hey, what does the government care? They've got theirs. Everyone else can eff off. Everyone, that is, who isn't a large campaign donor. So we'll continue cutting taxes, signing costly unfair trade deals, and basically pushing the knife in further ... the end of that cycle being anyone's guess.

I can only hope people finally awaken en masse to what's being done to them and vote these unamerican corporate proxies out of office before we literally go right off the cliff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. What we need is a real labor party.
We need people in DC to fight for more unions, not less. More regulation on big business, not less. More enviromental protections, not less.


People are finally starting to get angry. Some are very misguided by propaganda and head towards the tea party. But a lot more people are just furious and don't know where to turn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamsterDem Donating Member (819 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #31
37. Totally agreed on all counts. Totally
We're in this weird economic argument which goes something like this: If we (government) spend less and employers pay less (by way of eroding union rights), we'll all be better off. Even if I were rich I could only "agree" (cynically for my own benefit, in that case) with the latter. The reality is that government spending does actually benefit all people, including the rich. And of course we as Democrats disagree with the latter part because we know that when the American people earn decent paychecks (which anyone deserves for hard work) they also tend to spend that money in the economy. (I apologize if it seems as though I think I'm "teaching" this to anyone. I don't. Just venting aloud)

To be honest with you, sister, I don't understand what the collective stupidity is which hangs over our country now and has been building for 25+ years. I've tried and tried but for the life of me I just don't understand it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #31
40. .+
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
14. This is how it works: "WTO Upholds Obamas Tire Industry Relief Decision"
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 07:03 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
41. You can keep posting that repeatedly
but what does that one decisions, started by WORKERS, really mean when compared to
  • the millions of jobs lost for workers
  • the overall loss of benefits at existing jobs for workers
  • the overall loss of job security at existing jobs for workers
  • the overall loss of income, wage levels, and the stagnation of raises for workers
  • the vast loss of small family farms to bankruptcy and the loss of farming diversity, leading to consolidation of big-agribusiness mega-farms, and mono-culture farming
  • the millions of people displaced by poverty who become undocumented workers and illegal immigrants
  • etc.
These are the effects of free trade agreements. These are what Obama is giving us. One decision to support tire workers is hardly meaningful compared to all of that.

That would be like someone who spreads typhoid, but they stop and put a bandage on a kid's scraped knee. So you keep pointing to the bandage over and over again to prove he cares about people. The typhoid is a bit more relevant. In this case, the vast, overriding effects of free trade are far more relevant than one trade case in the other direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
23. ***
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
25. Another Obama FAIL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blkmusclmachine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
32. Always found it amusing that "nafta" is Spanish for "gasoline."
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
35. Um, hello? Why would a Korean NOT buy a Kia, if even an AMERICAN does? "Buy local" is
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 07:54 PM by WinkyDink
universal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
36. This and cutting medicare were the two things that made me mad listening to his speech
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LadyInAZ Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
43. I LIKE THIS..
SMILES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. WHY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #43
47. Why do you like it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. SMILES
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #48
69. She's a lady!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
45. " I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America
I want to see more products sold in the U.S. stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sad sally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. Most products with a label identifying them as such say "Made in USA"
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 09:56 PM by sad sally
Made in "America" can usually include Mexico, Canada, or other Central American countries. Only by scanning the bar code can you tell from which of the Americas a product is made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Excellent point!
I'm ashamed I didn't catch that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sad sally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. Don't be. It's the old shell game.
Bought one of those little six packages of diced Dole peaches the other day - didn't have my good glasses on, but saw "USA" so thought okay, they're US peaches. Got home and discovered they're Chinese peaches, packaged in Taiwain, distributed by Dole of California. Did I ever feel dumb!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #52
59. !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #49
63. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
64. It will say "Made in America"
. . . because the corporate headquarters has an address in Texas or South Carolina. The product will actually be made in Asia while corporations continue to starve American workers into submission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #64
71. +
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
65. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 22nd 2014, 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC